Groundwork

Legal developments

New housing laws pass every year. What matters is whether they work. Each entry here separates what a law says on paper from how it's playing out in practice, with a date on everything so you know how fresh it is.

All 48 jurisdictions in our four counties currently have state-approved housing elements (checked August 14, 2026).

SB 79: mid-rise housing near transit, statewide

State In effect

Makes 5-9 story housing an allowed use near major transit stops regardless of local zoning, in eight "urban transit counties." In the Bay Area that means San Francisco, Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties — Contra Costa's BART corridors are excluded, and so is Marin.

What the law says

Signed October 10, 2025; operative July 1, 2026. Near heavy rail (BART, Caltrain): up to 9 stories/160 units per acre within 200 feet of a station, stepping down to 6 stories at a half mile. Lower tiers for light rail and bus rapid transit. Affordability set-asides and labor standards attach to taller buildings. Cities can shift density between sites through HCD-approved "alternative plans" and claim specified exclusions. The law applies only in counties with 16 or more rail stations — a threshold that covers Alameda and San Francisco but excludes Contra Costa, Marin, and Sonoma.

What's actually happening

The biggest law-versus-practice gap we track. San Francisco's implementing ordinance (signed May 8, 2026) covers roughly 270 stops but permanently excludes three industrial districts and temporarily exempts about 19,850 parcels until 2032, with a longer-term alternative plan headed to HCD. Oakland's planning commission recommended interim exclusions in February 2026 using the law's "existing zoning is already half of SB 79 capacity" provision. Whether HCD accepts these approaches is unresolved. It approved San Jose's exclusions in June 2026 but rejected Beverly Hills' alternative plan in May. As of our July 2026 review, no wave of SB 79 project applications had been documented, and financing conditions remain the binding constraint.

Sources: Sen. Wiener announcement (Oct 2025) · SF Planning SB 79 implementation · Holland & Knight implementation tracker (June 2026) · ABAG SB 79 summary (April 2026)

Effective July 1, 2026 · Updated July 14, 2026

AB 130 / SB 131: CEQA exemption for infill housing

State In effect

The June 2025 budget package exempted most urban infill housing from CEQA review entirely — no unit cap, no affordability requirement, no transit proximity test — removing one to two years of study and the threat of environmental litigation for qualifying projects.

What the law says

AB 130 exempts housing projects up to 20 acres on previously developed or urban-surrounded sites consistent with local zoning, with prevailing wage required only above 85 feet (plus special rules for San Francisco projects of 50+ units). SB 131 adds "near-miss" streamlining and exempts rezonings that implement a compliant housing element. Effective immediately as budget trailer bills on June 30, 2025.

What's actually happening

San Francisco Planning runs a dedicated AB 130 exemption application, and land-use attorneys report active use by Bay Area infill developers — but no public count of exemptions granted exists yet, so claims about its impact are premature. The honest scholarly dispute: only 1-3% of housing projects were ever sued under CEQA, so the law's effect runs through removed delay and litigation risk, which is real but hard to measure. SB 131's rezoning exemption is already doing visible work — it is why San Francisco's Family Zoning Plan did not require a multi-year environmental impact report.

Sources: Greenberg Traurig analysis · ABAG regional guidance (updated April 2026) · SF Planning AB 130 exemption page

Effective June 30, 2025 · Updated July 14, 2026

San Francisco Family Zoning Plan

Local In court

San Francisco's biggest rezoning since the 1970s — capacity for roughly 36,000 additional units, mostly along west-side commercial corridors — is in effect but under legal attack from two opposite directions at once.

What the law says

Adopted 7-4 by the Board of Supervisors on December 2, 2025, signed December 12, effective January 12, 2026, ahead of the state's rezoning deadline tied to SF's housing element. Allows up to 10 stories on west-side corridors, with towers of 20-60 stories at selected nodes (parts of Geary, Van Ness); interior residential streets keep 4-story limits; rent-controlled buildings of 3+ units get demolition protections.

What's actually happening

Two lawsuits define its current life. Neighborhood and small-business groups sued in January 2026 arguing CEQA required a supplemental environmental review — a direct test of SB 131's rezoning exemption. YIMBY Law and the California Housing Defense Fund sued in February 2026 from the other side, arguing the plan falls short of the ~36,000-unit capacity SF promised the state and adds unlawful constraints. No ruling in either case as of mid-July 2026. If the YIMBY Law theory prevailed, SF's housing element compliance — and its shield against the builder's remedy — could reopen. Too early for production effects.

Sources: SF Planning overview · KQED explainer · YIMBY Law suit · The Real Deal on the dueling suits

Effective January 12, 2026 · Updated July 14, 2026

Housing element compliance: all 48 local jurisdictions currently in

State Implemented

Every jurisdiction in San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and Marin counties currently has a state-approved housing element, which keeps the builder's remedy closed across the region. This tracker's status strip is fed directly from HCD's compliance data, refreshed with our monthly data updates.

What the law says

Jurisdictions must adopt housing elements HCD finds substantially compliant with 6th-cycle (2023-2031) requirements. Noncompliance opens the builder's remedy (projects with qualifying affordability that local zoning cannot block) and can trigger stricter streamlining tiers and, ultimately, HCD enforcement referrals.

What's actually happening

Compliance is universal in our four counties as of HCD's July 2026 data — a big change from 2023, when several jurisdictions spent months out of compliance and accumulated vested builder's remedy applications that are still working through approval pipelines. Compliance is also conditional: HCD findings typically assume rezonings and programs are completed on schedule, and findings can be rescinded. The YIMBY Law suit over San Francisco's rezoning is the live threat to a compliance status in our coverage area. Statewide, about 90% of jurisdictions are compliant.

Sources: HCD compliance report (data refreshed weekly) · Compliance dataset (data.ca.gov)

Updated July 14, 2026

Builder's remedy, codified (AB 1893)

State In effect

The 2024 law that turned the builder's remedy from a vague statutory threat into a defined development pathway — currently unavailable everywhere in our four counties, because every jurisdiction has a compliant housing element.

What the law says

When a jurisdiction lacks a compliant housing element, projects meeting one of several affordability options (13% lower-income, 10% very-low, 7% extremely-low, 100% moderate, or small projects of 10 or fewer units on under an acre) cannot be denied for zoning inconsistency. AB 1893 added density definitions — generally the greatest of 1.5x the "Mullin" default density, 3x zoned density, or the site's housing-element density, plus a transit/resource-area bump — and barred agencies from demanding more than a 20% set-aside.

What's actually happening

Closed region-wide today, but not gone: applications vested during 2023-2024 noncompliance windows are still processing under these rules, and the remedy reopens instantly if any jurisdiction loses compliance (see the Family Zoning Plan litigation). Watch recently-cured jurisdictions with rezoning deadlines — compliance can be rescinded.

Sources: AB 1893 text · Holland & Knight summary

Effective January 1, 2025 · Updated July 14, 2026

SB 423 ministerial approval — and San Francisco's annual test

State Implemented

Extends and expands SB 35's streamlined, hearing-free approval for multifamily projects in jurisdictions behind on their housing targets. San Francisco is the only city in California reviewed annually, and became the state's first "10% jurisdiction" in 2024.

What the law says

Jurisdictions that miss their prorated RHNA targets must ministerially approve qualifying multifamily projects: a 10% affordable set-aside where above-moderate targets were missed, 50% where lower-income targets were missed. Projects under 10 units are exempt from set-asides; labor standards phase in with project size. Sunset extended to 2036.

What's actually happening

In San Francisco this is now the workhorse approval path: roughly 80 projects totaling more than 7,200 units had entered the streamlined pipeline by February 2026, with approvals in months instead of years — but only a few hundred of those homes have actually been built, because financing and construction costs, not approvals, are the current bottleneck. That gap between approvals and completions is the single best illustration of what process reform can and cannot do. HCD published updated determinations statewide on June 30, 2026. We have not yet verified each jurisdiction's new tier against that file, so tier references in this entry reflect the 2024 determinations.

Sources: HCD statutory determinations · SF Planning SB 423 page · The Frisc on SF's streamlined pipeline

Updated July 14, 2026

SB 9: duplexes and lot splits in single-family zones

State In effect

Allows up to two units and/or a lot split on most single-family parcels, approved ministerially. Legally durable after a 2025 appellate ruling, but production has stayed modest — a case study in why legalization alone doesn't guarantee construction.

What the law says

Ministerial approval for two-unit projects and urban lot splits in single-family zones, subject to site exclusions (farmland, wetlands, high fire severity without mitigation, historic districts, recent tenancy). SB 450 (effective 2025) added a 60-day decision clock and required cities to apply only the same objective standards they apply elsewhere in the zone.

What's actually happening

A Los Angeles trial court held SB 9 unconstitutional as applied to charter cities in 2024, but the Court of Appeal reversed in November 2025, and the law is enforceable statewide, including charter cities, while the case continues on remand. On the ground, SB 9 output across California has been a trickle relative to ADUs — lot economics, financing, and the physical awkwardness of splitting developed lots bind far more than the law now does.

Sources: Gov. Code 65852.21 · HCD SB 9 fact sheet (April 2026) · CP&DR on the appellate reversal

Effective January 1, 2022 · Updated July 14, 2026

21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (federal)

Federal In effect

The first major federal housing-supply law in decades became law on July 11, 2026 — passed with big bipartisan margins and left unsigned but unvetoed by the President. Its supply provisions lean on incentives rather than mandates, so effects depend heavily on HUD implementation.

What the law says

Consolidates roughly sixty bills. Supply-relevant provisions include NEPA streamlining and expanded categorical exclusions for housing, a $200 million per year fund rewarding local permitting and zoning reform, manufactured-housing chassis reform, HUD guidance for single-stair buildings up to six stories, CDBG usable for new affordable construction, and a ban on large institutional investors (350+ homes) buying single-family houses.

What's actually happening

Too new to have effects — HUD rulemaking and guidance are just beginning. For the Bay Area, the most consequential pieces are likely the local reform incentive fund (which rewards exactly the permitting changes our pipeline panel tracks) and federal single-stair guidance, which could influence California's stalled state-level debate. We will track implementation rather than the statute.

Sources: Congress.gov actions (H.R. 6644) · Bipartisan Policy Center summary · CalMatters on California implications

Effective July 11, 2026 · Updated July 14, 2026

Berkeley's middle housing and corridor rezonings

Local Implemented

Berkeley legalized multi-unit "middle housing" across most residential districts in late 2025 and upzoned the Southside near campus, with a bigger fight over wealthy commercial corridors (College, Solano, north Shattuck) heading to a vote in late 2026.

What the law says

The Middle Housing ordinance (effective November 1, 2025) allows multi-unit buildings in most residential zones. The Southside plan adds capacity for roughly 2,650 units with 60 units-per-acre minimums near campus. The corridor rezonings — a housing-element commitment — remain in draft.

What's actually happening

Ordinances are in effect but too recent to show up in permit data; watch our pipeline panel's Berkeley series over the next two years. The corridor rezoning is the item to watch politically — council held course through late-2025 backlash, with a final vote expected around the end of 2026.

Sources: City of Berkeley middle housing page · Berkeleyside on the corridor rezonings

Effective November 1, 2025 · Updated July 14, 2026

2026 legislative session: bills to watch

State Proposed

Three state efforts matter most for supply right now: the $11.25 billion affordable housing bond headed to the November ballot, construction-defect reform meant to revive condo building, and a Wiener bill protecting approved projects from post-approval delay tactics.

What the law says

The Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026 (AB 736 Wicks / SB 417 Cabaldon) was approved by the Legislature in June 2026: $11.25 billion, on the November 2026 ballot, needing majority voter approval. AB 1903 (Wicks) would require a right-to-cure process before construction-defect suits, addressing a major reason almost no condos get built. SB 677 (Wiener) would shield approved projects from delay via subdivision-map and financing-approval games.

What's actually happening

The bond is now a campaign, not a bill. Voters decide in November 2026. AB 1903 and SB 677 were still pending as of our last review. We will move items to the tracker proper as they pass or die.

Sources: Governor's announcement of the bond act (June 2026) · CA YIMBY 2026 legislation tracker · Alfred Twu bill tracker

Updated August 14, 2026

HCD enforcement: San Francisco's ongoing accountability review

State Implemented

No jurisdiction in our four counties faces an active state enforcement action — but San Francisco remains under the state's first-ever Policy and Practice Review, with its biggest remaining commitment due in fall 2026.

What the law says

HCD's 2023 San Francisco Housing Policy and Practice Review found the slowest approval timelines in California and imposed 18 required actions. Separately, HCD's Housing Accountability Unit issues notices of violation statewide — 15 in its March 2026 round, none in our counties.

What's actually happening

HCD reports San Francisco is up to date on required actions, with six remaining; the major one due in fall 2026 requires SF to make conforming projects fully ministerial at entitlement — which would be a structural change to how the city approves housing. SF has also earned a state Prohousing Designation. We treat HCD's enforcement letters dashboard as a source to watch for our jurisdictions.

Sources: HCD SF Policy & Practice Review · HCD enforcement letters dashboard · Governor's office on March 2026 notices

Updated July 14, 2026

How this tracker is maintained is on the methodology page.